MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071533116 · doi:10.1177/0270467610374872

How the Science Versus Religion Debate Has Missed the Point of Genesis 1 and 2: Jacques Ellul (1912-1994)

2010· article· en· W2071533116 on OpenAlexaff
Willem H. Vanderburg

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)NothingJudaismContext (archaeology)MoralitySociologyPerspective (graphical)EpistemologyReligious studiesAestheticsPhilosophyHistoryTheologyArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From a social and historical perspective, the conflict between science and religion regarding the opening chapters of Genesis in the Jewish and Christian Bibles may have more to do with uncritically reading these texts through our “cultural glasses” than with what these texts actually say. Within the context of his work, Jacques Ellul read these texts as having nothing to do with creation or evolution, but instead with the relations between God, his people, and the land. It includes a polemic against morality and religion as fundamental threats to these relations. This is an excerpt of a larger study of the first three chapters of Genesis, as well as other portions of the Jewish and Christian Bibles.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.042
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Science Technology & SocietySame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207